Navigate:

Dems stymied on filibuster reform

Senate Democrats are struggling to unite behind a single filibuster reform plan. |
AP Photo
Close

"The Senate is a place where senators representing millions of Americans are supposed to have their ideas heard and a real chance to impact legislation regardless of their party affiliation,” said Ryan Loskarn, staff director for the Senate Republican Conference. “Republicans believe rigorous floor debate and amending bills is how the Senate makes sure every Americans' voice is heard.”

McConnell has long criticized Reid for blocking the minority party from offering amendments to legislation – but Democrats counter that McConnell has abused the use of the filibuster.

Text Size

-

+

reset

There remains a possibility that the Senate may avert a floor fight altogether if a bipartisan agreement is reached, where Reid could allow for more open debate, while McConnell eases back on his party’s use of the filibuster. And Alexander, who is the incoming ranking member on the Senate Rules Committee, has had separate discussions on the issue with the chairman of the panel, New York Sen. Chuck Schumer.

Democrats say they don’t plan to do away with the 60-vote requirement to break filibusters – but want to discourage the overuse of the filibuster. Any senator can filibuster almost any Senate action – whether it’s bringing up a bill for debate or trying to push a measure toward a final vote. The cloture votes to override a filibuster can take days to unfold under the Senate rules.

In general, Democrats hope to narrow the scope of the filibuster, potentially doing away with the ability of one senator to simply object to even debating legislation. Democrats also hope to eliminate so-called secret holds, which allow senators to block legislation or a nomination anonymously. And they want to actually require senators to go to the floor and make their arguments public, much like the famous scenes in the movie classic, “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington.” These days, a simple threat of the filibuster is enough to thwart legislation and produce time-consuming cloture votes.

The problem for Democrats is that there have been several different approaches proposed, and the party hasn’t settled on one unified filibuster reform plan.

“There are 51 folks who have a lot of concern about the brokenness of the Senate,” Merkley said, “and I don’t think there are 51 folks on any specific proposal.”

McCaskill has been at the forefront of calling for the elimination of secret holds – and that effort appears to have the best chance of succeeding in the new Congress.

“Most of us want to support modest efforts at more transparency,” said McCaskill. “We’re not in any way diminishing the power of an individual senator to slow down the process…Where it becomes indefensible is the fact that it happens behind closed doors or in secret.”

Readers' Comments (51)

It is mind-boggling to try and follow the mental gymnastics of the Democrats that try to justify this move. Does nobody remember the Democrats filibustering George W. Bush's appointments endlessly and being warned that they were setting a dangerous precedent for how the filibuster was used? Even these past couple years - very few ACTUAL filibusters were performed. Reid always waited until he had enough votes to cut off debate and then filed cloture as soon as the bill came to the floor. I GUARANTEE that if they succeed in changing the rules and the GOP maintains the House and secures a majority in the Senate, in 2012 the Democrats will be screaming for the rules to go back to they way they were.

Which is not to say that the filibuster shouldn't be reformed. I propose to shift the burden from those passing legislation to those blocking legislation by a simple procedure change.

Instead of requiring at least 60 votes to file cloture and cut off debate, I propose that it be replaced by requiring a certain number of votes (probably about 30-40 votes), to EXTEND the debate on the legislation in question. This shifts the burden onto the opposition.

HOWEVER, that also needs to be accompanied by a requirement that there MUST be a minimum amount of time for a bill to be debated on the floor - something like a minimum of 2 weeks. or perhaps 3 days for every 100 pages in the bill. Every time it is amended/changed the clock resets. This could only be overriden by a 2/3 or perhaps 3/4 majority vote in the case of an emergency - this would prevent the 'bill dumping' that the Democrats seem so fond of by unveiling the finished product hours or the day before the final vote.

Go ahead and change the senate rules, NO bill can pass with out the house consent and two years is a short time for both the senate and president. Then the fur will surely fly and RATS and cockroaches will be scattering.

I'm sure the Democrats only want to end the filibuster for two years, sort of like extending the Bush tax cuts. Then if, as everyone expects, they slide into minority status, then they'll want it back.

The value of the filibuster was shown over the last two years as they only thing holding the oppressive Democrat majority from totally running roughshod over the American people. Without the filibuster cap and tax would be a reality, with its higher energy costs. Twenty million people in the country illegally would now be voters, assuring the Democrats of a permanent majority.

Harry Reid should figure out a way not to allow the Republicans to vote at all. Afterall, according to him, the Senate is allowed to set their own rules. I would not worry about the mainstream media reporting any of this. They have not reported anything else Reid or Pelosi has done.

Oh yeah, your SuperSmart Acme-Certified Rocket Scientist Democrat Party on the loose. Let's see, you have nowhere near a functional majority to push through a statist agenda, you will pass absolutely nothing that can't get through the House, you just lost your butts on Nov. 2nd and you could well be facing a bloodbath in '012 and NOW you want to change the rules? Really? Especially with the very good chance that in 2 years you will be in the distinct minority? Really?! OK!!!

Demcrats in the Senate - your worst groundhog day nightmare. Each day last forever. They are lying thugs who don't care about the truth - a day is 24 hours long. I will have my children watch the democrat make things up as they go along, and show them how stupid grown men and women can be.

"The widely shared sentiment is that the Senate is broken "------Widely shared by who? The Democrats think the Senate is broken because they can't get every single piece of legislation through that they want. They want the Republicans to roll over for them. This is a disgusting power grab by the Democrats. It is undemocratic and evil. This must be stopped.

Throughout the '80's and '90's Democrats were all for eliminating the filibuster...then they lost their Senate majority and used it quite effectively to block numerous Bush appointees from getting the requisite Senate confirmation. Now, they want to manipulate the system so that they can continue to ram through the agenda the America rejected in the last election...elections have consequences as someone once said. There will be another one soon. If the current Democratic majority in the Senate uses more tricks to manipulate the system, they will face another crushing defeat at the polls in 2012...

Then we'll get to hear them cry how the system is broken...again (3rd time in 10 years)...

This country isn't ungovernable, what it does require if building a broadbased moderate coalition across both parties to pass legislation. When a party doesn't do that, it's usually punished at the next election for not respecting "the will of the people." This happened last November and if the Dem's in the Senate screw around with the system in order to play more tricks...they'll be punished yet again.

“Filling the tree to prevent amendments and cutting off debate to silence the minority is the sort of obstruction that has prevented the senate from doing its job,” said Loskarn, the GOP leadership aide.

Dem obstruction that silenced the minority is EXACTLY why the dems are doomed. They had enough rope to hang themselves.

I can't believe that Politico is running this story--again, the audacious and tyrannical nature of the Dems is even more in display. They really think that they should be allowed to change the rules depending whether they have major or minor majorities, or are in the minority. If this wasn't so scary, it would be hillarious.

The hypocrisy from the Right is astonishing...first they snicker and rant about how ineffective the Dems were when the Dems had a 'supermajority' in the Senate. And now they whine and cry about any change in the filibuster rules because it seems the Dems were ineffective only because of the great heroics and courage of the minority's willingness to use [abuse] the Senate rules to continuously stymie the Dems' 'supermajority'. Which is it, morons? The Dems ought to have the courage to change the rules for the next two years and we should all enjoy the squeals of the little gop piggies and their idiot supporters here who just can't seem to get their facts straight. Oh but for the joy.....

As it's been said, the GOP House has the final say on anything passed 1st in the Senate.

AND, when it comes to the Obamacare repeal, this no filibuster rule will be the downfall of Obamacare.

Instead of 60 votes, it will only take 51 to pass the repeal.

And don't think that there won't be 3-5 Dems that will be voting repeal as there are 23 Dem Senators up fo re-election in 2012. Sen Nelson is champing at the bit to vote for a repeal! And there are a LOT of Senate Dems ready to put this Albatross behind them before 2012. And if they don't vote for repeal now, they will be pounded with it for the next two years!

Even Schumer admitted, on the Senate floor during the tax break debate, that the voters sent a message, repeal Obamacare.

There's a lot of Dems that are sorry voting for Obacare, now. A lot of those have already gone home. And with 23 Dem Senators running in 2012, a lot more want this pig, GONE!

And remember one thing Socialists, not ALL Dems are Progressives! And, there are now MORE self professed GOP adults than Dems, by 7%! And only 21% of DEMS say they are Liberals. Of course we know better than that, but at least most are not Socialists at the end of the day.

And if they vote rpeal down, it WILL be a campaign ad waiting for an event.

Count on it.

At this point, I am not so sure that killing the filibuster rule is a bad idea.... for the GOP!

And, if Udall and Schumer have their way, the Senate can change the rules EVERY Session! That means it will only take 51 votes to CHANGE IT BACK when the GOP takes the Senate!

I don't see a down side. The GOP will start using this as a Dem Power Grab ad right now, yet take advantage of it for the next two years! And this will kill any excuses for the Dems based on a Filibuster.